Open access Original scientific paper

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5552/crojfe.2020.620

Recovery of Forest Soil Chemical Properties

Following Soil Rehabilitation Treatments:
an Assessment Six Years after Machine
Impact
Meghdad Jourgholami, Somayeh Khajavi, Eric R. Labelle

Abstract

Several rehabilitation treatments have been applied to mitigate runoff and sediment in machine
trafficked areas following logging operations, while the knowledge on the consequence of these
remediation techniques on the recovery of soil properties remains scarce. The objective of the
study was to determine the effect of different rehabilitation treatments including sawdust
mulch (SM), water diversion structure (WDS), untreated/bare trail (U), and undisturbed or
control area (UND) on the recovery of soil chemical properties over a six-year period after
machine-induced compaction occurred on three longitudinal trail gradients (10, 20, and 30%).
In each treatment, the following soil properties were measured: litter thickness, pH, EC, soil
organic C, total N, and available P, K, Ca, and Mg. Five sampling plots (with 10 m length
and 4 m width) were positioned in each trail gradient classes and three of these plots were
randomly considered for soil sampling. The results demonstrate that litter thickness differed
among the three treatments, with the highest amount present on the UND area and lowest on
the U treatment. Meanwhile, the highest pH (6.75), EC (0.21 Ds m−1), N (0.27%), available
P (14.61 mg kg−1), available K (123.5 mg kg−1), available Ca (135.1 mg kg−1), and available Mg
(42.1 mg kg−1) and the lowest C (1.21%) and C/N ratio (7.83%) were found on the SM with
gradient of 10% compared to other gradient classes on SM, WDS and, U treatments. The
recovery value of litter depth, pH, EC, C, N, C/N ratio, and available nutrients (P, K, Ca, and
Mg) were higher on the SM than the WDS at the gradient of 10%, while significantly higher
levels of these variables were measured under WDS installed on trail gradients of 30% and
20% when compared with the same gradients on SM. Results of the study revealed that soil
chemical properties showed some evidence of recovery following SM and WDS rehabilitation
treatments compared to U, although these properties did not fully recover within 6 years as
compared to UND area.
Keywords: soil compaction, soil health, soil protection, mulching, water diversion structure

1. Introduction sity (Merino et al. 1998, Cambi et al. 2017), decreased

Mechanized forest harvesting systems, particu-
larly machines used for wood extraction, have shown
trends of heavier gross mass and payloads, resulting
in a potential for increased soil compaction and dis-
turbance (Labelle and Jaeger 2011, Jourgholami et al.
2014, Cambi et al. 2015, Jourgholami et al. 2019b). The
in-stand traffic of these machines is often performed
directly on soils, which results in increased bulk den-
soil porosity (Bottinelli et al. 2014, Fründ and Averdiek
2016), reduced air permeability (Goutal et al. 2013),
and reduced water infiltration rate (Croke et al. 2001,
Toivio et al. 2017), thus contributing to forest soil deg-
radation and tree growth impediments (Labelle and
Kammermeier 2019). Machine-induced soil compaction
also negatively influences the nutrient availability and
soil fauna (Etehadi Abari et al. 2017). The degradation

Croat. j. for. eng. 41(2020)1 163

M. Jourgholami et al. Recovery of Forest Soil Chemical Properties Following Soil Rehabilitation Treatments ... (163–175)
of soil physical properties following soil disturbance
alters soil-water relations and hydrological processes
under the soil upper layer, which leads to surface wa-
ter flow as well as runoff and sediment deposition on
downstream networks (Gökbulak et al. 2008, Jourg-
holami et al. 2017). However, soil compaction may not
always alter microbial processes and can, in some in-
stances, improve soil water holding capacity on sandy
soils (Shestak and Busse 2005).
Ground-based harvesting operations not only de-
crease canopy percentage through the removal of tar-
get trees but also displace and reduce the intact litter
layer (Stuart and Edwards 2006, Etehadi Abari et al.
2017), which plays a key role on the entry of water,
energy, and nutrient into substrate layers, and protects
the surface soil from raindrop impacts (Stuart and
­Edwards 2006, Sayer 2006). A significantly higher amount
of runoff and sediment following forest harvesting has
been reported by several researchers (Sawyers et al.
2012, Webb et al. 2012, Wear et al. 2013, Jourgholami
et al. 2017). Some Best Management Practices (BMPs)
including mulching, seeding, contour-felled log ero-
sion barriers have been proposed, implemented, and
tested to mitigate impacts to the soil from ground-
based skidding located on trails trafficked by machines
and landing areas where wood is stored (Stednick
2008, Wade et al. 2012, Webb et al. 2012, Jourgholami
and Etehadi Abari 2017, Jourgholami et al. 2017).
Agricultural straw, wood strands, wood fibers, hy-
dromulch, etc. are known as organic mulch that can
provide ground cover once scattered on the soil sur-
face. In turn, they can protect soil aggregates from the
direct impact force of raindrop hitting the surface soil,
control soil temperature and moisture, increase infil-
tration rate, and decrease runoff volume. Previous
studies indicated that the application of organic mulch
was effective to reduce post-harvest runoff and sedi-
ment (Wade et al. 2012, Wagenbrenner et al. 2015, Cristan
et al. 2016, Jourgholami and Etehadi Abari 2017).
­However, the efficacy of applying mulch for erosion
control depended on trail gradient, soil type, and
mulch type (Smets et al. 2008). The presence of mulch
covers dispersed on the soil surface influences soil
properties and hydrological processes (Smets et al. 2008).
Mulch can also affect soil fauna, which is necessary for
the decomposition rate of organic matter, mineraliza-
tion of nutrient, and improvement of soil quality
­(Merlim et al. 2005). Jourgholami and Etehadi Abari
(2017) found that rice straw mulch reduced runoff and
sediment by 50 to 60% after ground-based skidding
operations performed on compacted machine operat-
ing trails as compared to uncovered soil. Furthermore,
organic mulch can act as a supplementing source of
164
organic matter, which in turn stimulates the decom-
position rate on the topsoil.
Another method to suppress runoff and sediment
is the use of water diversion structures or contour-
felled log erosion barriers. These features consist of
logs installed on the ground in a shallow trench ori-
ented in a parallel or diagonal direction to contour
lines, thus providing mechanical barriers to over-
whelming flow, diminishing slope length, increasing
infiltration, maintaining surface roughness, and trap-
ping sediments (Yanosek et al. 2006, Robichaud et al.
2008, Prats et al. 2016). The efficiency of contour felled
logs highly depends on the installation quality and
storage capacity, while the effectiveness of water diver-
sion structures dramatically declines during heavy
storm events (Robichaud et al. 2008). For slope reha-
bilitation treatments, distance between consecutive
structures is decreased with higher slope. By attenuat-
ing runoff flow, the contour-felled logs, in turn, can
provoke the restoration processes of soil physical and
chemical properties through the dispersion of the over-
land water to the intact forest floor (Prats et al. 2014).
Rehabilitation and stabilization treatments includ-
ing mulching, seeding, and contour-felled erosion bar-
riers can be applied to alleviate runoff and soil loss
immediately after wildfire and forest harvesting
(Jordán et al. 2010, Díaz-Raviña et al. 2012, McCullough
and Endress 2012, Lombao et al. 2015). In fact, the
­effectiveness of these treatments on physiochemical
and microbiological soil properties has been well
­documented following wildfire. However, the level of
knowledge of the influence of rehabilitation treat-
ments on recovery of soil quality after machine impact
remains scarce, particularly when considering soil
chemical properties. Jourgholami et al. (2018) concluded
that the recovery values of soil bulk density, total
­porosity, penetration resistance and rut depth continued
to show signs of machine-induced disturbance over a
6-year monitoring period.
Diverse responses of soil physical properties ex-
posed to ground-based mechanized forest operations
have been widely reported. The severity of the impact
depends on initial soil density, harvesting system
used, soil type, gradient of trail, climate, and time
elapsed after compaction (Kozlowski 1999, Croke et
al. 2001, Cambi et al. 2015). Soil recovery refers to the
process of regaining or returning soil to a normal or
natural state or restoration to a former or better condi-
tion. Physical properties of a severely compacted soil
can take decades to naturally recover (Kozlowski 1999,
Cambi et al. 2015). In the Flemish region, Belgium,
Ampoorter et al. (2010) found that the compacted soil
was not completely recovered within seven to nine
Croat. j. for. eng. 41(2020)1
Recovery of Forest Soil Chemical Properties Following Soil Rehabilitation Treatments ... (163–175)
years after mechanized harvesting. On the silty tem-
perate-forest soils in northeastern France, Bottinelli et
al. (2014) found that soil macroporosity recovered in
the upper soil layer (7 cm) under natural condition
over 2–3 years following heavy traffic. However, some
studies indicated that recovery of compacted soil
might persist 40–100 years (Greacen and Sands, 1980,
Croke et al. 2001). Meyer et al. (2014) reported that
planting black alders (Alnus glutinosa L. Gaertn.) initi-
ated the recovery of compacted soil structure and po-
rosity over seven years, however, the full recovery of
soil parameters may take more time to return to un-
compacted levels. Consequently, reclamation of soil
physical and chemical properties without renewal and
rehabilitation treatments is a prolonged process (Kleibl
et al. 2014, Ebeling et al. 2016).
Unfortunately, the flood events occurring in the
lowland and coastline areas located near the Caspian
Sea have reached serious levels because of ground-
based skidding operations in the upland region of the
Hyrcanian forests. Mountainous area and climate con-
dition (especially high rainstorm coinciding with leaf-
less period of trees instantly after soil disturbance)
have an inclination to increase runoff flow and sedi-
ment deposition to downstream networks. Therefore,
mitigation and rehabilitation treatments should be
engaged to reduce these impacts on forest soil and
subsequently to metropolitan infrastructures and res-
idents. This study aimed to assess the effects of mulch-
ing (SM) and water diversion structure (WDS) on the
Fig. 1 Study area located in Gorazbon district in northern Iran (A), experimental design. SM, WDS, U, and UND are different treatments (B)
Croat. j. for. eng. 41(2020)1
M. Jourgholami et al.
recovery of soil chemical properties of the topsoil of
machine operating trails with varying gradients (10,
20, and 30%) exposed to heavy skidder traffic (10 ma-
chine passes), compared to untreated / bare trail (U),
and undisturbed area (UND area) over six years after
timber extractions under the mixed deciduous forest
(north of Iran).
The SM and WDS treatments were applied direct-
ly on machine operating trails with two main inten-
tions: first, to mitigate the surface runoff and soil loss
after machine-induced soil compaction, and second,
to rehabilitate the machine operating trail and return
the quality of the soil to a condition similar to what is
present in the tree-covered area. These intentions are
pivotal since some trail segments may or may not be
used upon re-entry, and it is therefore expected that
trails be protected to allow them the opportunity to
support unobstructed tree growth.
The hypothesis was that the rehabilitation treat-
ments (SM and WDS) would create a protective layer
over the soil surface and thus provide better condi-
tions that would promote faster recovery of soil chem-
ical properties as compared to uncovered trails U.
2. Material and Methods
2.1 Site and Machine Description
This study was conducted in the Kheyrud Forest
Research Station located approximately seven kilo­
meters east of Nowshahr in the Mazandaran province,
165
M. Jourgholami et al. Recovery of Forest Soil Chemical Properties Following Soil Rehabilitation Treatments ... (163–175)
northern Iran. The research covers the compartment
309 in Gorazbon district (Fig. 1a). The study area is
located from 990 to 1210 m above sea level on the
south coast of the Caspian Sea with moderate topog-
raphy comprised of slopes ranging from 0–30%. De-
ciduous broadleaved forests, with canopy cover rang-
ing from 70–100%, are mostly composed of oriental
beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky), hornbeam (Carpinus
betulus L.), oak (Quercus castaneifolia C.A.M.), alder
(Alnus subcordata C.A.M.), and velvet maple (Acer
­velutinum Boiss.). The forest is managed by combined
silvicultural treatments including group and single-
tree selection harvests and has an average standing
volume of 428 m3 ha−1. The mean annual precipitation
is about 1260 mm yr−1, with the largest share occurring
during the summer and autumn seasons. The mean
annual temperature is 8.6 °C and the highest and low-
est temperatures are experienced in July and February,
respectively. The dominated soil type is deep forest
brown soil, which corresponds to both the upper
­Jurassic and lower Cretaceous periods. According to
the unified soil classification system (USCS), the soil
was identified and classified as CH or clay with a high
plasticity. Soil bearing capacity (California Bearing
Ratio), as determined with a dynamic cone penetro­
meter, was 10–12%. Classes were fine or thin and
types of soil structure were blocky and subangular
blocky structures.
A Timberjack 450C wheeled skidder was used to
extract logs from the forest stand to a roadside land-
ing. Specifics of the machine and corresponding loads
were the following: an empty weight of 10.3 metric
tons (load distribution of 55% and 45% between front
and rear axles), 4 tires (24.5–32) without chains exert-
ing average ground pressure of 220 kPa, average load
volume of 3.4 cubic meters, numbers of logs per load-
ed pass ranged between 1 and 2, and log length ranged
between 5–8 m, while the width of the machine oper-
ating trails was 3.5 m.
2.2 Experimental Design
Based on visual observations during the 2011 for-
est operations, segments of machine operating trails
exposed to 10 machine cycles (a cycle consisted of one
unloaded and one loaded pass) were selected for fur-
ther investigation. Five sampling plots (with 10 m
length and 4 m width) were positioned in each trail
gradient class (10, 20 and 30%) and three of these plots
were randomly selected for soil sampling. Instantly
after machine traffic, the reclamation treatments of
SM and WDS were applied to machine operating
trails in each gradient class. The SM treatment was
comprised of sawdust of beech and hornbeam species
166
(1–5 cm in diameter and 0.4–14.0 cm in length) and it
was applied on the surface of the compacted trail at a
rate of 3.65 kg m−2, which formed a 3 cm thick layer
(Jourgholami et al. 2018). The WDS consisted of in-
stalling felled logs (25–30 cm in diameter and 4 m in
length) perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the
machine operating trails. The spacing between con-
secutive felled logs was set at 10 m (Jourgholami et al.
2018). The untreated area (U) was also exposed to the
same traffic intensity and the same three gradient
classes as the other two treatments but did not receive
any rehabilitation treatment. In July 2017 (6 years after
harvesting), three sub-plots were established per plot
for detailed soil sampling. Each sub-plot was com-
posed of three transects (perpendicular to machine
traffic), where soil samples were collected from the
left and right wheel tracks and between tracks (three
samples per transect). In addition, one soil sample per
plot was collected at a distance of 20 m from the trails
in the undisturbed forest area (UND area) to verify
the undisturbed soil properties. Samples from the
UND area were collected in each trail gradient class
but will be reported as averages since their properties
were very similar between gradients. In each treat-
ment, the following soil properties were measured:
litter thickness, pH, EC, soil organic C, total N, and
available P, K, Ca, and Mg. In total, 270 soil samples
were collected and analyzed (3 soil samples/transect
× 3 transects/plot × 3 trail gradients × 3 treatments × 3
replicates + 1 soil sample/plot × 3 trail gradients × 3
treatments × 3 replicates) (Fig. 1b).
2.3 Soil Sampling and Analysis
At each measurement point, soil samples were tak-
en at 0–10 cm from the surface soil with a steel cylinder
(length of 40 mm and diameter of 56 mm). The thick-
ness (depth) of litter was measured with a tape mea-
sure. The recovery levels of soil physical properties
including soil bulk density (BD), total porosity (TP),
penetration resistance (PR), and soil moisture (M) after
SM and WDS treatments, compared to U trails and
UND area, were also measured and analyzed. As this
article focused on soil chemical properties, detailed
information of sampling methodology for soil physical
properties is explained in Jourgholami et al. (2018). Be-
fore gathering the soil samples, organic horizons were
removed to provide access to the mineral soil. Soil
samples were placed in bags, identified, transferred to
the lab, air-dried, and sieved through a 2-mm sieve. An
Orion Ionalyzer (Model 901) pH meter was used for
measuring soil pH in a 1:2.5 ratio of soil:water (Salehi
et al. 2013). The EC was recorded by an Orion Ionalyzer
EC meter in a 1:2.5 ratio of soil:water (Salehi et al. 2013).
Croat. j. for. eng. 41(2020)1
Recovery of Forest Soil Chemical Properties Following Soil Rehabilitation Treatments ... (163–175) M. Jourgholami et al.

The Walkley-Black technique (Walkley and Black 1934)
was used to measure soil organic C and the Kjeldahl
method was applied for determining total N (Salehi et
al. 2013). A spectrophotometer was used to determine
the available phosphorous (P) by the Olsen method
and an atomic absorption spectrophotometer was used
to measure the available potassium (K), calcium (Ca),
and magnesium (Mg) (Kooch et al. 2014).
2.4 Statistical Analyses
A factorial experiment with a complete block de-
sign was randomly assigned to the following factors:
treatments (SM, WDS, U, and UND area), and trail
gradients (10, 20, and 30%). Generalized linear model-
ing (two-way analysis of variance; ANOVA) was used
to relate the recovery of soil chemical properties to
treatment and trail gradient. The Kolmogorov-
Smirnov test (α=0.05) was used to check the normality
of soil properties. The Levene’s test (α=0.01) was ap-
plied to verify the homogeneity of variance among
treatments. The post hoc test was used to detect statis-
tically significant differences between the treatment
and trail gradient group means by the Duncan’s mul-
tiple range tests with a 95% confidence level. To assess
the relationship among soil physical and chemical
properties, the Pearson correlation was applied. The
analyses were performed using the SPSS software
package (release 17.0; SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA). A prin-
cipal component analysis (PCA) is a multivariate anal-
ysis method that investigates complex relationships
among variables. Multivariate correlations were ap-
plied to evaluate significant relationships among prin-
cipal components and variables by using the XLSTAT
2016 software.
3. Results
3.1 Soil Properties
Significant differences in soil chemical properties
among the treatments were observed six years after
mulch application. Soil properties including pH, avail-
able P, K, Ca and Mg were significantly influenced by
trail gradient, but the litter thickness, EC, C, N, and
C/N ratio were not significantly different among trail
gradient classes. In addition, all tested soil chemical
properties were influenced by the interaction between
treatments and trail gradient with the exception of soil
EC (Table 1).
The litter thickness under the SM located in 10%
trail gradient was significantly higher compared to
WDS and U treatments, while thicker litter amounts
were found on the gradients of 20 and 30% under the
WDS as compared to other treatments. The highest
soil pH values were found on the SM of 10% gradient
(6.75) followed by 30% and 20% gradients of the WDS
treatment, whereas the lowest pH values were mea-
sured on the UND area. The largest amounts of ­organic

Table 1 Analysis of variance (ANOVA; F test and p value) for the effects of treatment and trail gradient and their interactions on soil chemi-
cal properties over a six-year period after traffic

Treatment, 3 d.f. Trail gradient, 2 d.f. Treatment × Trail gradient, 6 d.f.

Soil property
F test p value F test p value F test p value

Litter thickness, cm 265.67 <0.001 1.14 0.320 12.89 <0.001

pH, 1:2.5 H2O 323.26 <0.001 6.63 0.002 39.59 <0.001
EC, ds/m 51.41 <0.001 2.92 0.056 1.69 0.123
C, % 337.89 <0.001 0.61 0.545 3.49 0.002
N, % 129.55 <0.001 1.62 0.200 12.36 <0.001
C/N ratio 50.56 <0.001 0.05 0.954 5.99 <0.001
Available P, mg kg–1 745.71 <0.001 36.31 <0.001 25.51 <0.001
–1
Available K, mg kg 1693.4 <0.001 45.98 <0.001 185.1 <0.001
Available Ca, mg kg–1 1745.3 <0.001 115.5 <0.001 109.03 <0.001
–1
Available Mg, mg kg 535.03 <0.001 23.62 <0.001 42.93 <0.001

d.f. – degrees of freedom

Different treatments are included SM, WDS, U, and UND area
p values less than 0.05 are given in bold

Croat. j. for. eng. 41(2020)1 167

M. Jourgholami et al. Recovery of Forest Soil Chemical Properties Following Soil Rehabilitation Treatments ... (163–175)

Table 2 Means (±SE) of soil chemical properties by different treatment and trail gradient classes

Trail gradient
Soil property Treatment UND
10% 20% 30%

U 7.5±0.3 a 3.7±0.2 e 3.4±0.2 e 3.3±0.26 e

Litter thickness, cm SM 7.5±0.3 a 4.9±0.1 c 4.5±0.3 cd 4.5±0.2 cd
WDS 7.5±0.4 a 4.4±0.2 d 5.7±0.2 b 5.7±0.2 b
U 5.44±0.37 f 5.80±0.31 e 5.73±0.29 e 5.75±0.26 e
pH, 1:2.5 H2O SM 5.46±0.32 f 6.75±0.41 a 6.18±0.36 c 6.17±0.35 c
WDS 5.43±0.29 f 6.06±0.35 d 6.33±0.37 b 6.36±0.42 b
U 0.31±0.08 a 0.17±0.04 c 0.16±0.03 c 0.16±0.06 c
EC, ds/m SM 0.29±0.09 a 0.21±0.06 b 0.17±0.05 c 0.17±0.04 c
WDS 0.28±0.11 a 0.18±0.07 bc 0.19±0.04 bc 0.19±0.03 bc
U 5.32±0.28 a 2.36±0.15 b 2.59±0.17 b 2.71±0.26 b
C, % SM 5.36±0.35 a 1.21±0.19 e 1.64±0.22 cd 1.68±0.23 c
WDS 5.32±0.32 a 1.63±0.11 cd 1.34±0.28 de 1.16±0.17 e
U 0.38±0.07 a 0.14±0.04 d 0.13±0.04 d 0.13±0.07 d
N, % SM 0.39±0.09 a 0.27±0.05 b 0.17±0.06 cd 0.16±0.06 cd
WDS 0.38±0.08 a 0.14±0.03 d 0.20±0.07 c 0.19±0.04 c
U 15.14±2.34 b 21.56±3.25 a 21.62±4.25 a 23.42±2.95 a
C/N ratio SM 15.19±3.02 b 4.83±2.11 d 10.92±1.25 bc 12.25±1.74 bc
WDS 14.25±2.52 b 14.92±2.34 b 7.27±1.56 cd 6.29±1.47 cd
U 20.45±3.46 a 6.41±1.33 f 5.61±1.05 g 5.46±0.95 g
–1
Available P, mg kg SM 19.30±2.92 a 14.61±3.41 b 8.93±1.45 e 8.32±1.39 e
WDS 18.89±4.02 a 9.78±1.64 d 11.37±2.06 c 11.61±2.26 c
U 143.96±7.23 a 84.3±5.13 f 82.1±4.71 f 81.4±4.63 f
–1
Available K, mg kg SM 143.14±8.72 a 123.5±7.11 b 94.4±6.12 e 94.6±6.58 e
WDS 138.73±9.02 a 99.2±4.74 d 113.6±6.14 c 112.2±6.27 c
U 167.22±9.1 a 87.6 ±7.8 e 74.9±6.9 f 70.8±6.9 f
–1
Available Ca, mg kg SM 162.49±11.2 a 135.1±8.6 b 101.9±7.4 d 96.5±8.5 e
WDS 159.32±10.6 a 110.3±9.1 d 125.8±9.2 c 117.4±7.8 c
U 49.72±4.12 a 25.2±4.60 e 22.4±4.35 f 21.8±2.20 f
Available Mg, mg kg–1 SM 46.04±3.80 a 42.1±5.10 b 32.5±2.90 d 31.4±3.80 d
WDS 45.40±4.20 a 31.7±2.91 d 36.8±3.70 c 37.7±4.10 c

Different letters in each soil property indicate significant differences among trail gradient classes and treatments (p<0.01) based on Duncan’s test over a six-year period
after traffic

C were detected on the UND area and ranged between area. Application of SM and WDS had a significant
5.32 and 5.36%, whereas organic C was significantly effect on organic C. At a gradient of 10%, the highest
lower on the U treatment compared with the UND amount of organic C was detected on the WDS treat-

168 Croat. j. for. eng. 41(2020)1

Recovery of Forest Soil Chemical Properties Following Soil Rehabilitation Treatments ... (163–175) M. Jourgholami et al.

Table 3 Pearson correlations between soil physical properties and litter thickness and soil chemical properties

Soil properties pH EC C N C/N P K Ca Mg

BD 0.37** –0.39** –0.51** –0.41** –0.01 ns –0.41** –0.41** –0.34** –0.30**

TP –0.34** 0.39** 0.51** 0.41** 0.01 ns 0.41** 0.41** 0.34** 0.30**

PR 0.43** –0.41** –0.59** –0.48** –0.02 ns –0.51** –0.48** –0.46** –0.39**

M 0.04 ns –0.04 ns –0.00 ns –0.03 ns 0.05 ns –0.09 ns –0.12 ns –0.09 ns –0.06 ns

Litter thickness 0.01 ns 0.53** 0.32** 0.65** –0.34** 0.78** 0.80** 0.80** 0.73**

Note: *p<0.05; **p<0.01; ns: not significant

ment as compared to SM. However, organic C was
statistically higher on the SM with 30% and 20% gra-
dients as compared with the same gradients under the
WDS (Table 2).
The highest total N was observed under three gra-
dient classes in the UND area followed by the SM with
10% gradient. Total N showed a significant decrease as
trail gradient increased from 10 to 20% in the SM, while
significantly increasing in the WDS as the trail gradient
increased from 10 to 20%. Regardless of the gradient
class, largest values of C/N ratio were found in the un-
treated trails (U) and were even larger than the values
of C/N ratio for the UND area. The lowest levels of C/N
ratio were observed on the SM in the gradient of 10%
and on the WDS with gradients of 20 and 30%. Sig-
nificantly higher values of available P, K, Ca, and Mg
were observed in all trail gradient classes under UND
area followed by the SM at a gradient of 10% > WDS
with gradients of 30% and 20%, while the lowest
amounts of available P, K, Ca, and Mg were recorded
at all gradient classes on the U treatment (Table 2).
The Pearson correlation analyses show that BD1
and TP were positively and significantly correlated
with pH and negatively correlated with EC, C, N,
C/N, and available P, K, Ca, and Mg. Soil TP signifi-
cantly increased with increasing EC, C, N, C/N, and
available P, K, Ca, and Mg, as well as with decreasing
soil pH. Soil moisture was not significantly correlated
with any other soil chemical properties. Likewise, lit-
ter thickness significantly decreased with increasing
soil C/N ratio, and also with decreasing other soil
chemical properties (Table 3).
1
Soil physical properties (BD – bulk density, TP – total poros-
ity, PR – penetration resistance, M – soil moisture) referred to
the physical responses data published by Jourgholami et al.
(2018).
3.2 Soil Recovery Levels
The highest litter recovery was measured in the
SM treatment, while on the steepest gradient, the larg-
est litter recovery was found in the WDS treatment.
On the 10% trail gradient, the higher recovery rate of
pH was detected on the SM treatment, whereas on the
20 and 30% gradients, the higher recovery values of
pH were detected on the WDS. The recovery value of
EC was significantly higher (by 23%) under the SM
with 10% gradient compared to the WDS, while EC
showed greater recovery under the WDS with 20%
and 30% gradients (Fig. 2).
The recovery of organic C on the SM at a gradient
of 10% was significantly higher than the value under
the WDS with the same gradient. The recovery rate of
total N revealed that the SM had a significant effect
on the 10% trail gradient, while the WDS was more
effective on trails with gradients higher than 10%. The
recovery value of the C/N ratio was enhanced by ap-
plying the SM at a trail gradient of 10%, while the
WDS was mostly effective on gradients higher than
10%. In the trail gradient of 10%, the recovery values
of available P, K, Ca, and Mg were greater on the SM
than the values measured with the WDS. In contrast,
levels of available P, K, Ca, and Mg were higher with
the WDS than the values of the SM on trail gradients
greater than 10% (Fig. 2).
Based on the results of a principal component
analysis (PCA) using multivariate correlations, the
first two principal components including axis 1 and
axis 2 explained 73.0% and 24.7% of total variance,
respectively, and both explained the largest fraction
by 97.7% of total variance. The UND area was corre-
lated with litter thickness and soil physical (BD, TP,
PR, and M) and chemical properties (e.g., C, N, EC,
available P, K, Ca, and Mg), while the other treat-
ments (e.g. U, SM, and WDS) were located in the left

Croat. j. for. eng. 41(2020)1 169

M. Jourgholami et al. Recovery of Forest Soil Chemical Properties Following Soil Rehabilitation Treatments ... (163–175)

Fig. 2 Recovery value of litter thickness (A), pH (B), EC (C), C (D), N (E), C/N ratio (F), P (G), K (H), Ca (I), and Mg (J) by SM and WDS per
trail gradient classes six years after skidding operations. Changes are relative to measurements from the same profile class in U treatment

170 Croat. j. for. eng. 41(2020)1

Recovery of Forest Soil Chemical Properties Following Soil Rehabilitation Treatments ... (163–175) M. Jourgholami et al.

concluded that recovery processes in soil chemical

properties may take a few decades after machine-in-
duced compaction (Greacen and Sands 1980, Croke et
al. 2001, Bottinelli et al. 2014, Ebeling et al. 2016, Cambi
et al. 2017). When considering soil physical properties,
Jourgholami et al. (2018) demonstrated that soil bulk
density and total porosity were partially recovered
­following SM and WDS rehabilitation treatments
­compared to U, although these properties did not
fully recover 6 years after treatment, compared to
UND area. Results of the current study are consistent
with findings of Mulumba and Lal (2008) and Jordán
et al. (2010), which support the application of organic
mulch such as SM as a measure to reduce the bulk
density and penetration resistance, enhance soil
­aggregate stability and water retention capabilities.
Six years after soil compaction and consequent
treatments, litter depths and soil chemical properties
were lower than those recorded in the corresponding
UND areas in the three treatments (SM, WDS, and U).
In the SM, litter thickness included the litter added due
to litter fall every year and the amount of SM on sur-
face soil. Results also revealed that the application of
the SM (which was a mixture of beech and hornbeam
Fig. 3 Principal component analysis (PCA) ordination of the differ- species) created an appropriate cover on the soil sur-
ent treatments face that resulted in lowering the effects of raindrops,
and could thus minimize soil particle detachment and
transport on downstream networks. Accordingly, ap-
PCA. The U treatment was positively correlated with plying the SM has increased soil organic matter, de-
soil C/N ratio, while both SM and WDS treatments creased organic C, and decreased the C/N ratio in the
were highly correlated with soil pH (Fig. 3). surface layer of the soil.
The organic C and C/N ratio were significantly
higher on the trail gradient of 10% with the SM than
4. Discussion with the WDS, which was mainly due to the higher
Results confirm that machine-induced soil distur- accumulation of organic matter and lower decomposi-
bance and compaction lead to the reduction, and in tion and mineralization rates. However, previous stud-
some instances, complete removal of the litter layer ies stated that some soil properties, such as accumula-
that has a key role in maintaining soil quality as re- tion of organic content, C/N ratio, and litter
ported in previous studies (Sayer 2006, Stuart and decomposition rate, were mostly related to tree species,
­Edwards 2006, Jodaugiene et al. 2010, Cambi et al. 2015, soil type, and climate condition (Sayer 2006, Schaefer
Jordán et al. 2010, Lombao et al. 2015). The removal of et al. 2009, Jodaugiene et al. 2010, Maggard et al. 2012).
the litter layer can cause decreased food source, altered Moreover, mulch can also influence the temperature
microclimate of surface soil, and decreased popula- and moisture of the underlying soil by providing cov-
tions of soil fauna, which results in a decrease of soil er and thus shading the soil surface from direct solar
porosity and aeration (Sayer 2006, Mulumba and Lal radiation (Mulumba and Lal 2008, Jodaugiene et al.
2008, Frey et al. 2009, Majnounian and Jourgholami 2010, Jordán et al. 2010, Díaz-Raviña et al. 2012, Cristan
2013). Six years after applying the reclamation treat- et al. 2016). Hence, SM can play a key role in the soil
ments, the SM and WDS treatments showed that val- rehabilitation process by favoring higher soil moisture
ues of the tested soil chemical properties differed from retention and decreased soil temperature at the soil
the values of the corresponding UND area (acting as surface. These effects can stimulate biological activity
control). However, the recovery processes of soil and soil fauna, especially during dry summer seasons,
chemical properties were slow to return and remained where unprotected soils would be exposed to high soil
high on the untreated area (U). Several authors have surface temperature and water deficit (Jordán et al.

Croat. j. for. eng. 41(2020)1 171

M. Jourgholami et al. Recovery of Forest Soil Chemical Properties Following Soil Rehabilitation Treatments ... (163–175)
2010, Ampoorter et al. 2011, Cristan et al. 2016). Fur-
thermore, soils in wetter climates recover faster from
compaction than those in drier climates (Jordán et al.
2010, Fang et al. 2011). Similarly, Ampoorter et al.
(2010) concluded that soil biological activities by soil
fauna were effective in reducing high values of soil
penetration resistance. Furthermore, fallen leaves from
the canopy that are laying on the soil surface during
the leafless period in the mixed-deciduous forest in the
study area provided natural ground cover that reduced
runoff and erosion risk. Considering that the study
area has two dominant tree species, beech and horn-
beam, it is preferable to use the logs and pulpwood in
the construction of WDS from the beech species, which
can persist against decay for a few years. Hornbeam
logs decayed after two to three years and gradually
rotted, while beech logs remained unrotten for several
years and their decay rate was much slower than that
of hornbeam logs, thus making beech a better option.
Additionally, WDS can create mini-debris dams that
can reduce water flow and increase infiltration and
sediment deposition by allowing more time for the wa-
ter to infiltrate the soil surface and percolate through
the soil horizons (Foltz and Dooley 2003). However,
when the sediment storage capacity for the area lo-
cated above the log was reached, these features could
no longer trap sediments effectively, especially during
severe rain events in the late summer and early fall. In
such instances, the efficacy of the WDS treatment was
reduced drastically. Based on previous literature
­(Yanosek et al. 2006, Robichaud et al. 2008, Prats et al.
2016), the distance of 10 m between consecutive log
erosion barriers is probably too short on a 10% trail
gradient and the distances between log erosion barriers
on the downslope should have differed for the 10, 20,
and 30% treatments. As the terrain increased in gradi-
ent, distance between the log erosion barriers placed
on machine operating trails should decrease.
Wagenbrenner et al. (2006) found that mulching
was more effective than contour-felled logs to reduce
runoff and sediment over three years after fire due to
the ground cover increment after mulch application.
Both SM and WDS can also affect soil water, particu-
larly in the upper soil layer by diverting runoff flow,
thus resulting in a reduction of water saturation in the
pores in the surface soil layer that leads to further in-
crease abiotic activity of pore space formation, and
enhance air-soil gas exchange, diffusion and soil aera-
tion. Following the SM decomposition processes from
organic matter into other products, the soil organic C
accumulation was decreased in the soil surface, which
resulted in a significantly higher C/N ratio with the
SM treatment on a trail gradient of 10%. Many authors
172
have reported that mulch decomposition rate, density
and cover percentage can affect the recovery of the
post-harvest soil quality (Prats et al. 2012, Robichaud
et al. 2013, Lombao et al. 2015, Fernández and Vega
2016, Jourgholami et al. 2019a).
5. Conclusions
The effects of different soil rehabilitation treat-
ments, including sawdust mulch (SM), water diversion
structure (WDS), and untreated / bare trail (U) from
compacted soil, on the recovery of soil chemical prop-
erties located on machine operating trails with three
longitudinal gradients (10, 20, and 30%) were exam-
ined over a six year period and compared to the values
measured in UND area. Our hypothesis that both re-
habilitation treatments would provide faster recovery
of soil chemical properties as compared to uncovered
plots (U) was supported by our data. However, tested
soil properties were not fully recovered over the six-
year period as compared to the UND areas.
Based on the results of the current study, the fol-
lowing management approaches can be addressed to
rehabilitate machine operating trails after ground-
based skidding operations:
Þ SM is suitable for the reclamation practice and
mitigating runoff and soil loss in machine oper-
ating trails with a gradient of 10% or less
Þ WDS is a proper method to mitigate the adverse
effects of soil compaction and decrease runoff
and soil loss in the trail with a gradient higher
than 10%
Þ The longevity of SM should be considered be-
fore application and deterioration rate should
be linked to how long the mulch is expected to
provide protection to the soil
Þ The longevity, durability, and proper installa-
tion have an important influence on the efficacy
of WDS treatments. Beech logs are more durable
than hornbeam logs
Þ The optimal SM rate (kg m-2) and appropriate
distance between WDS require further investi-
gations, particularly when considering varying
terrain topography.
6. References
Ampoorter, E., De Schrijver, A., De Frenne, P., Hermy, M.,
Verheyen, K., 2011: Experimental assessment of ecological
restoration options for compacted forest soils. Ecol. Eng.
37(11): 1734–1746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2011.07.007
Croat. j. for. eng. 41(2020)1
Recovery of Forest Soil Chemical Properties Following Soil Rehabilitation Treatments ... (163–175)
Ampoorter, E., Van Nevel, L., De Vos, B., Hermy, M., Ver-
heyen, K., 2010: Assessing the effects of initial soil character-
istics, machine mass and traffic intensity on forest soil com-
paction. For. Ecol. Manag. 260(190) 1664–1676. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.foreco.2010.08.002
Bielders, C.L., Michels, K., Bationo, A., 2002: On-farm evalu-
ation of ridging and residue management options in a Sahe-
lian millet-cowpea intercrop. 1. Soil quality changes. Soil Use
Manag. 18(3): 216–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-2743.2002.
tb00242.x
Bottinelli, N., Hallaire, V., Goutal, N., Bonnaud, P., Ranger, J.,
2014: Impact of heavy traffic on soil macroporosity of two
silty forest soils: Initial effect and short-term recovery. Geo-
derma 217–218: 10–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoder-
ma.2013.10.025
Cambi, M., Certini, G., Neri, F., Marchi, E., 2015: The impact
of heavy traffic on forest soils: A review. For. Ecol. Manag.
338: 124–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2014.11.022
Cambi, M., Paffetti, D., Vettori, C., Picchio, R., Venanzi, R.,
Marchi, E., 2017: Assessment of the impact of forest harvest-
ing operations on the physical parameters and microbiologi-
cal components on a Mediterranean sandy soil in an Italian
stone pine stand. Eur. J. Forest Res. 136(2): 205–215. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10342-016-1020-5
Cristan, R., Aust, W.M., Bolding, M.C., Barrett, S.M., Munsell,
J.F., Schilling, E., 2016: Effectiveness of forestry best manage-
ment practices in the United States: Literature review. For.
Ecol. Manag. 360: 133–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fore-
co.2015.10.025
Croke, J., Hairsine, P., Fogarty, P., 2001: Soil recovery from
track construction and harvesting changes in surface infiltra-
tion, erosion and delivery rates with time. For. Ecol. Manag.
143(1–3): 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00500-4
Díaz-Raviña, M., Martín, A., Barreiro, A., Lombao, A., Igle-
sias, L., Díaz-Fierros, F., Carballas, T., 2012: Mulching and
seeding treatments for post-fire soil stabilization in NW
Spain: Short-term effects and effectiveness. Geoderma 191:
31–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.01.003
Ebeling, C., Lang, F., Gaertig, T., 2016: Structural recovery in
three selected forest soils after compaction by forest machines
in Lower Saxony, Germany. For. Ecol. Manag. 359: 74–82.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.09.045
Epron, D., Plain, C., Ndiaye, F-K., Bonnaud, P., Pasquier, C.,
Ranger, J., 2016: Effects of compaction by heavy machine traf-
fic on soil fluxes of methane and carbon dioxide in a temper-
ate broadleaved forest. For. Ecol. Manag. 382: 1–9. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.09.037
Etehadi Abari, M., Majnounian, B., Malekian, A., Jourghola-
mi, M., 2017: Effects of forest harvesting on runoff and sedi-
ment characteristics in the Hyrcanian forests, northern Iran.
Eur. J. Forest Res. 136(2): 375–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10342-017-1038-3
Fang, S., Xie, B., Liu, D., Liu, J., 2011: Effects of mulching ma-
terials on nitrogen mineralization, nitrogen availability and
poplar growth on degraded agricultural soil. New. For. 41(2):
147–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-010-9217-9
Croat. j. for. eng. 41(2020)1
M. Jourgholami et al.
Fernández, C, Vega, J.A., 2016: Are erosion barriers and straw
mulching effective for controlling soil erosion after a high
severity wildfire in NW Spain? Ecol. Eng. 87: 132–138. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2015.11.047
Foltz, R.B., Dooley, J.H., 2003: Comparison of erosion reduc-
tion between wood strands and agricultural straw. T. ASAE
46(5): 1389–1396.
Frey, B., Kremer, J., Rüdt, A., Sciacca, S., Matthies, D., Lüscher,
P., 2009: Compaction of forest soils with heavy logging ma-
chinery affects soil bacterial community structure. Eur. J. Soil
Biol. 45(4): 312–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejsobi.2009.05.006
Fründ, H-C., Averdiek, A., 2016: Soil aeration and soil water
tension in skidding trails during three years after trafficking.
For. Ecol. Manag. 380: 224–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fore-
co.2016.09.008
Gökbulak, F., Serengil, Y., Özhan, S., Özyuvacı, N., Balcı, A.N.,
2008: Relationship between streamflow and nutrient and
sediment losses from an oak-beech forest watershed during
an 18-year long monitoring study in Turkey. Eur. J. Forest Res.
127(3): 203–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-007-0195-1
Goutal, N., Renault, P., Ranger, J., 2013: Forwarder traffic im-
pacted over at least four years soil air composition of two
forest soils in northeast France. Geoderma 193–194: 29–40.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.10.012
Greacen, E.L., Sands, R., 1980: Compaction of Forest Soil, a
review. Aust. J. Soil Res. 18(2): 163–189.
Jodaugiene, D., Pupaliene, R., Sinkevičiene, A.,
Marcinkevičiene, A., Žebrauskaite, A., Baltaduonyte, M.,
Čepuliene, R., 2010: The influence of organic mulches on soil
biological properties. Zemdirbyste 97(2): 33–40.
Jordán, A., Zavala, L.M., Gil, J., 2010: Effects of mulching on
soil physical properties and runoff under semi-arid condi-
tions in southern Spain. Catena 81(1): 77–85. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.catena.2010.01.007
Jourgholami, M., Etehadi Abari, M., 2017: Effectiveness of
sawdust and straw mulching on postharvest runoff and soil
erosion of a skid trail in a mixed forest. Ecol. Eng. 109: 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2017.09.009
Jourgholami, M., Labelle, E.R., Feghhi, J., 2017: Response of
Runoff and Sediment on Skid Trails of Varying Gradient and
Traffic Intensity over a Two-Year Period. Forests 8(12): 472.
https://doi.org/10.3390/f8120472
Jourgholami, M., Khajavi, S., Labelle, E.R., 2018: Mulching
and water diversion structures on skid trails: Response of soil
physical properties six years after harvesting. Ecol. Eng. 123:
1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2018.08.023
Jourgholami, M., Soltanpour, S., Etehadi Abari, M., Zenner,
E.K., 2014: Influence of slope on physical soil disturbance due
to farm tractor forwarding in a Hyrcanian forest of northern
Iran. iForest 7(5): 342–348. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor1141-
007
Jourgholami, M., Labelle, E.R., Feghhi, J., 2019a: Efficacy of
leaf litter mulch to mitigate runoff and sediment yield fol-
lowing mechanized operations in the Hyrcanian mixed for-
173
M. Jourgholami et al. Recovery of Forest Soil Chemical Properties Following Soil Rehabilitation Treatments ... (163–175)
ests. J. Soils Sediments 19(4): 2076–2088. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11368-018-2194-x
Jourgholami, M., Ghassemi, T., Labelle, E.R., 2019b: Soil
physio-chemical and biological indicators to evaluate the
restoration of compacted soil following reforestation. Ecol.
Indic. 101: 102–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.01.009
Kleibl, M., Klvač, R., Lombardini, C., Porhaly, J., Spinelli, R.,
2014: Soil compaction and recovery after mechanized final
felling of Italian coastal pine plantations. Croat. J. For. Eng.
35(1): 63–71.
Kooch, Y., Zaccone, C., Lamersdorf, N.P., Tonon, G., 2014: Pit
and mound influence on soil features in an Oriental Beech
(Fagus Orientalis Lipsky) forest. Eur. J. For. Res. 133(2): 347–
354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-013-0766-2
Kozlowski, T.T., 1999: Soil compaction and growth of woody
plants. Scand. J. For. Res. 14(6): 596–619. https://doi.
org/10.1080/02827589908540825
Labelle, E.R., Jaeger, D., 2011: Soil compaction caused by cut-
to-length forest operations and possible short-term natural
rehabilitation of soil density. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 75(6): 2314–
2329. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2011.0109
Labelle, E.R., Kammermeier, M., 2019: Above- and below-
ground growth response of Picea abies seedlings exposed to
varying levels of soil relative bulk density. Eur. J. For. Res.
138: 705–722. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-019-01201-6
Lombao, A., Díaz-Raviña, M., Martín, A., Barreiro, A., Fontúr-
bel, M.T., Vega, J.A., Fernández, C., Carballas, T., 2015: Influ-
ence of straw mulch application on the properties of a soil
affected by a forest wildfire. Span. J. Soil Sci. 5(1): 26–40.
https://doi.org/10.3232/SJSS.2015.V5.N1.03
Maggard, A.O., Will, R.E., Hennessey, T.C., McKinley, C.R.,
Cole, J.C., 2012: Tree-based mulches influence soil properties
and plant growth. Hortic. Tech. 22(3): 353–361.
Majnounian, B., Jourgholami, M., 2013: Effect of rubber-tired
cable skidder on soil compaction in Hyrcanian forest. Croat.
J. For. Eng. 34(1): 123–135.
McCullough, S.A., Endress, B.A., 2012: Do postfire mulching
treatments affect plant community recovery in California
coastal sage scrub lands? Environ. Manag. 49(1): 142–150.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-011-9777-2
Merino, A., Edeso, J.M., González, M.J., Marauri, P., 1998: Soil
properties in a hilly area following different harvesting man-
agement practices. For. Ecol. Manag. 103(2–3): 235–246.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(97)00229-6
Merlim, A.D., Guerra, J.G.M., Junqueira, R.M., de Aquino,
A.M., 2005: Soil macrofauna in cover crops of figs grown
under organic management. Sci. Agr. 62(1): 57–61.
Meyer, C., Luscher, P., Schulin, R., 2014: Recovery of forest
soil from compaction in skid tracks planted with black alder
(Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertn.). Soil Till. Res. 143: 7–16. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2014.05.006
174
Mulumba, L.N., Lal, R., 2008: Mulching effects on selected
soil physical properties. Soil Till. Res. 98(1): 106–111. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2007.10.011
Prats, S.A., MacDonald, L.H., Monteiro, M., Ferreira, A.J.D.,
Coelho, C.O.A., Keizer, J.J., 2012: Effectiveness of forest resi-
due mulching in reducing post-fire runoff and erosion in a
pine and a eucalypt plantation in north-central Portugal.
Geoderma 191: 115–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoder-
ma.2012.02.009
Prats, S.A., Malvar, M.C., Martins, M.A.S., Keizer, J.J., 2014:
Post-fire soil erosion mitigation: a review of the last research
and techniques developed in Portugal. Geogr. Res. Lett. 40(2):
403–427. http://dx.doi.org/10.18172/cig.2519
Prats, S.A., Wagenbrenner, J., Malvar, M.C., Martins, M.A.S.,
Keizer, J.J., 2016: Mid-term and scaling effects of forest resi-
due mulching on post-fire runoff and soil erosion. Sci. Total
Environ. 573: 1242–1254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scito-
tenv.2016.04.064
Robichaud, P.R., Lewis, S.A., Wagenbrenner, J.W., Ashmun,
L.E., Robert, E., Brown, R.E., 2013: Post-fire mulching for run-
off and erosion mitigation, Part I: Effectiveness at reducing
hillslope erosion rates. Catena 105: 75–92. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.catena.2012.11.015
Robichaud, P.R., Wagenbrenner, J.W., Brown, R.E., Wohlge-
muth, P.M., Beyers, J.L., 2008: Evaluating the effectiveness of
contour-felled log erosion barriers as a post-fire runoff and
erosion mitigation treatment in the western United States.
Int. J. Wildland Fire. 17(2): 255–273. https://doi.org/10.1071/
WF07032
Salehi, A., Ghorbanzadeh, N., Kahneh, E., 2013: Earthworm
biomass and abondance, soil chemical and physical proper-
ties under different poplar plantations in the north of Iran. J.
For. Sci. 59(6): 223–229.
Sawyers, B., Bolding, M., Aust, W., Lakel, W., 2012: Effective-
ness and implementation costs of overland skid trail closure
techniques in the Virginia Piedmont. J. Soil Water Conserv.
67(4): 300–310. https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.67.4.300
Sayer, E.J., 2006: Using experimental manipulation to assess
the roles of leaf litter in the functioning of forest ecosystems.
Biol. Rev. 81(1): 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S1464793105006846
Schaefer, M., Migge-Kleian, S., Scheu, S., 2009: The role of soil
fauna for decomposition of plant residues. In: Brumme, R.,
Khanna, P.K. (Eds.), Functioning and Management of Euro-
pean Beech Ecosystems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 207–230 p.
Shestak, C.J., Busse, M.D., 2005: Compaction alters physical
but not biological indices of soil health. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.
69(1): 236–246. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2005.0236
Smets, T., Poesen, J., Knapen, A., 2008: Spatial scale effects on
the effectiveness of organic mulches in reducing soil erosion
by water. Earth-Sci. Rev. 89(1–2): 1–12. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2008.04.001
Croat. j. for. eng. 41(2020)1
Recovery of Forest Soil Chemical Properties Following Soil Rehabilitation Treatments ... (163–175)
Stednick, J.D., 2008: Hydrological and biological responses
to forest practices: The Alsea Watershed Study. Springer
Science+Business Media, LLC, 316 p.
Stuart, G.W., Edwards, P.J., 2006: Concepts about forests and
water. North. J. Appl. For. 23(1): 11–19. https://doi.
org/10.1093/njaf/23.1.11
Toivio, J., Helmisaari, H-S., Palviainen, M., Lindeman, H.,
Ala-Ilomäki, J., Sirén, M., Uusitalo, J., 2017: Impacts of timber
forwarding on physical properties of forest soils in southern
Finland. For. Ecol. Manag. 405: 22–30. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.foreco.2017.09.022
Wade, C.R., Bolding, M.C., Aust, W.M., Lakel, W.A., 2012:
Comparison of five erosion control techniques for bladed
skid trails in Virginia. South. J. Appl. For. 36(4): 191–197.
https://doi.org/10.5849/sjaf.11-014
Wagenbrenner, J.W., MacDonald, L.H., Coats, R.N., Robi-
chaud, P.R., Brown, R.E., 2015: Effects of post-fire salvage
logging and a skid trail treatment on ground cover, soils, and
sediment production in the interior western United States.
For. Ecol. Manag. 335: 176–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foreco.2014.09.016
© 2019 by the authors. Submitted for possible open access publication under the terms and conditions
of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Received: January 22, 2019
Accepted: May 16, 2019
Croat. j. for. eng. 41(2020)1
M. Jourgholami et al.
Wagenbrenner, J.W., MacDonald, L.H., Roug, D., 2006: Ef-
fectiveness of three post-fire rehabilitation treatments in the
Colorado Front Range. Hydrol. Process. 20(14): 2989–3006.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.6146
Walkley, A., Black, C.A., 1934: An examination of wet diges-
tion method for determining soil organic matter and pro-
posed modification of the chromic acid titration method.
Soil. Sci. 37(1): 29–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00010694-
193401000-00003
Wear, L.R., Aust, W.M., Bolding, M.C., Strahm, B.D., Dolloff,
C.A., 2013: Effectiveness of best management practices for
sediment reduction at operational forest stream crossings.
For. Ecol. Manag. 289: 551–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foreco.2012.10.035
Webb, A.A., Dragovich, D., Jamshidi, R., 2012: Temporary
increases in suspended sediment yields following selective
eucalypt forest harvesting. For. Ecol. Manag. 283: 96–105.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2012.07.017
Yanosek, K.A., Foltz, R.B., Dooley, J.H., 2006: Performance
assessment of wood strand erosion control materials among
varying slopes, soil textures, and cover amounts. J. Soil Wa-
ter Conserv. 61(2): 45–51.
Authors’ addresses:
Assoc. prof. Meghdad Jourgholami, PhD *
e-mail: mjgholami@ut.ac.ir
Somayeh Khajavi, MSc
e-mail: khajavi1340@ut.ac.ir
University of Tehran
Faculty of Natural Resources
Department of Forestry and Forest Economics
P.O.Box: 31585–4314
Karaj
IRAN
Asst. prof. Eric R. Labelle, PhD
e-mail: eric.labelle@sbf.ulaval.ca
Department of Wood and Forest Sciences
Université Laval
2405 Rue de la Terrasse
Québec, G1V OAG
CANADA
* Corresponding author
175